Leveraging the FOC at International Organizations | IGF 2023 Open Forum #109

Veronica Ferari

The analysis explores a range of important points discussed by the speakers. One significant topic highlighted is the importance of multi-stakeholder engagement in shaping Internet policies. Both APC and FOC support and encourage people to use and shape the Internet. This involvement ensures that policies are representative and inclusive, taking into account the diverse needs and perspectives of different stakeholders.

Another key point raised is the significance of incorporating the voices of marginalized groups in decision-making processes. APC, FOC, TIFER, and the Digital Equality Task Force are actively working towards this goal. They have made commendable efforts to include and amplify the voices of marginalized communities who are often underrepresented or marginalized in decision-making arenas. Recognizing that decision-making should be inclusive and inclusive of marginalized voices is crucial for reducing inequalities and promoting gender equality.

The discussion also highlighted concerns regarding AI and emerging technologies. APC draws attention to the fact that these technologies have the potential to create or exacerbate existing inequalities. It is crucial that norms and frameworks governing the use and development of AI and emerging technologies take into account the potential societal implications, ensuring that they do not reinforce inequalities or promote discrimination.

FOC’s role in coordinating international discussions on cybersecurity and cybercrime is recognized as pivotal. The importance of taking a human-centric approach to cybersecurity, one that prioritises human rights and builds on international human rights frameworks, is emphasised. The Joint Statement on the Human Rights Impact of Cybersecurity Laws, Practices, and Policies from 2020 underscores this need. It is suggested that FOC could build on existing language and positions where consensus already exists, further strengthening its role in promoting cybersecurity while safeguarding human rights.

The speakers also touch upon the significance of prioritising cybercrime treaty negotiations. It is agreed that this should be considered a key priority, given the growing threat of cybercrime and the need to ensure effective international cooperation to combat it. Furthermore, concerns are raised regarding the weakening of human rights language in cybersecurity negotiations. This observation highlights the importance of maintaining strong human rights principles within the context of cybersecurity discussions.

The need for multi-stakeholder and civil society participation in the GDC (Global Digital Cooperation) negotiations is strongly advocated. It is argued that inclusive participation from different stakeholders, including civil society, is essential to ensure that decisions and policies are informed and representative of global perspectives. A civil society meeting held on day zero of the GDC is mentioned, indicating efforts to coordinate and include civil society voices in the negotiation process.

Visa issues are identified as a barrier to global majority voices participating in the conversation. The inability of staff from APC and others to attend the event due to these issues highlights the need for more inclusive and accessible processes to allow for the equal representation of all voices in global discussions.

The analysis also reveals support for regional inclusivity in multi-stakeholder representation. The experience with Canada during the chairship, which involved organising regional consultations, is cited as evidence of this support. Regional representation ensures that the perspectives and needs of specific regions are taken into account when formulating policies and making decisions.

Another important observation made during the analysis is the need for better coordination between different forums and initiatives. The presence of numerous organisations following similar processes suggests the potential for duplication and inefficiency. Improved coordination can enhance collaboration and avoid unnecessary overlaps, enabling more effective and streamlined progress towards common goals.

In conclusion, the analysis highlights the significance of multi-stakeholder engagement, the inclusion of marginalized voices, the potential inequalities associated with AI and emerging technologies, the importance of a human-centric approach to cybersecurity, the prioritisation of cybercrime treaty negotiations, concerns over weakening human rights language in cybersecurity negotiations, the need for multi-stakeholder and civil society participation in the GDC negotiations, the impact of visa issues on global majority voices, support for regional inclusivity, and the necessity for better coordination between different forums and initiatives. These insights underscore the importance of inclusivity, representation, and cooperation in shaping Internet policies and digital cooperation globally.

Audience

The discussion highlights the importance of including diverse voices in decision-making processes, emphasizing that it is crucial for creating inclusive and fair outcomes. The audience member, who works at the U.S. Department of State and has experience in chairing discussions and decision-making processes, stresses the significance of diverse perspectives in shaping policies and initiatives.

However, challenges arise in bringing together global majority voices due to the presence of multiple forums and processes. The audience member’s experience at the U.S. Department of State reflects these challenges. Hence, it is essential to address these challenges in order to effectively listen to and represent the voices of the global majority.

During their chairship year, the Dutch government is advised to adopt a focused approach and actively engage with the existing global majority voices. By doing so, they can ensure a more inclusive and representative decision-making process. The example of the Canadian government is cited, wherein consultations were conducted with every region to gather comprehensive and diverse input.

Moreover, it is emphasized that strengthening the existing voices in the coalition is crucial for encouraging new members to join. By supporting and amplifying the existing voices, the coalition can attract a wider range of perspectives and enhance its impact. The value of collaboration and partnership is also highlighted as a means of strengthening the coalition.

Overall, the discussion underlines the significance of inclusivity in decision-making processes and addresses the challenges in bringing together global majority voices. It suggests adopting a proactive and focused approach to engaging with and strengthening existing voices while attracting new members. In doing so, decision-making processes can become more equitable and representative.

Alison Petters

The US government’s chairship of the Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) has played a pivotal role in bolstering international engagement and coordination in technology-related issues. Through collaborative efforts with global partners, the US has effectively addressed key technological challenges and promoted a rights-respecting approach to technology-related policies. This positive sentiment is reinforced by the fact that the US government has shown strong commitment to the FOC, with both presidential commitment and the active engagement of the Secretary of State in the coalition’s activities.

One of the notable achievements of the FOC under the US chairship is its successful response to new issues concerning human rights online. The coalition has issued a statement on the threat of surveillance technologies and has developed guiding principles on the government’s use of surveillance technology. These efforts demonstrate the FOC’s dedication to safeguarding human rights in the digital space.

However, there are challenges that the FOC needs to address. Integrating human rights perspectives with digital sectors and increasing the visibility of the FOC are two issues that require attention. It is crucial to consider diverse perspectives when making decisions and to ensure that the FOC’s activities are visible and impactful.

To achieve a holistic impact on governments worldwide, there is a need for more diversity in the FOC’s member countries. The challenge lies in bringing more countries from the global majority into the coalition. By including a broader range of countries, decisions made by the FOC will have a more comprehensive impact on governments globally.

The FOC also has potential as a key voice in the ongoing negotiations of the UN’s cybercrime treaty. Alison Petters, an advocate for a tight scoping of the treaty, supports the FOC as a mechanism to coordinate perspectives among like-minded partners. This demonstrates the value of the FOC in shaping global discussions on cybercrime.

Additionally, the FOC recognizes the importance of protecting human rights and marginalized groups online. Alison emphasizes the need to not undermine existing human rights frameworks and highlights the importance of continuous consultation with stakeholders to represent their perspectives.

The FOC supports the multi-stakeholder model in online governance processes, recognizing the need for meaningful engagement from various stakeholders. Alison emphasizes the importance of getting the modalities right so that multi-stakeholders can effectively contribute to the decision-making processes.

Adapting to address new threats to human rights online is crucial for the FOC’s continued relevance. Surveillance technologies and artificial intelligence pose new challenges, and the FOC must stay ahead to effectively protect human rights in the digital realm.

While expanding the diversity of the advisory network is crucial, efficiency should not be compromised. Balancing the inclusion of diverse voices with maintaining productivity is essential for the effective functioning of the advisory network.

The FOC has demonstrated successful engagement with global majority governments and has actively included non-FOC members in discussions about technology and human rights. This intensive dialogue and ongoing engagement contribute to the FOC’s mission of promoting global cooperation on these critical issues.

Furthermore, the FOC recognizes that governments with limited resources can still be involved through support and by understanding the benefits they stand to gain. This approach ensures that all governments have the opportunity to participate and contribute.

Lastly, civil society plays a crucial role in supporting the FOC’s mission. Beyond providing additional support, civil society organizations should also help expand networks and contribute to consultations. The advisory network serves as a key source of support for the FOC, and the coalition has actively consulted civil society in key countries to gather diverse perspectives.

In conclusion, the US chairship of the FOC has strengthened international engagement and coordination in technology-related issues. The coalition has successfully addressed new challenges concerning human rights online but faces obstacles in integrating human rights perspectives with digital sectors and increasing its visibility. There is a need for greater diversity in the FOC’s member countries to ensure a comprehensive impact on governments worldwide. The FOC can also play a significant role in negotiating the UN’s cybercrime treaty and advocating for the protection of human rights and marginalized groups online. The multi-stakeholder model in online governance processes is supported, and the FOC must adapt to new threats to human rights in the digital space. The advisory network is essential but expanding its diversity should be balanced with maintaining efficiency. The FOC’s engagement with global majority governments has been successful, and governments with limited resources can still participate with support. Civil society’s involvement goes beyond additional support and should contribute to network expansion and consultations.

Ernst Norman

The analysis focuses on the Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) and its efforts to promote human rights and digital cooperation. Various speakers expressed their support for the coalition and highlighted specific aspects of its work.

Ambassador Ernst Norman expressed his support for FOC’s initiatives in training policymakers on complex technical topics related to artificial intelligence. For example, Canada has trained FOC policymakers and applied this knowledge in diplomatic negotiations. The FOC’s Joint Statement on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights was praised for its continued relevance.

The United States was commended for energising the coalition and bringing important issues to the table. They played a significant role in including FOC in the Summit for Democracy and updating the coalition’s terms of reference, preparing it for the next decade.

The Netherlands emphasised the importance of a multi-stakeholder approach to Internet governance, with a strong focus on human rights. The diverse membership and multi-stakeholder structure of the FOC were highlighted. The Netherlands aims to coordinate its positions in future digital governance forums through the FOC.

Ambassador Ernst Norman also advocated for expanding digital equality and connectivity. He proposed broadening the FOC’s membership, particularly with like-minded countries from the global majority. The FOC’s global representation and network can support this endeavour.

Enhancing engagement with all stakeholders was deemed crucial. The FOC’s advisory network involves stakeholders providing advice on governance aspects. Ambassador Ernst Norman aims to ensure widespread support and realistic positions for the FOC in negotiations for Global Digital Cooperation (GDC).

The importance of agenda setting and internal coordination in addressing human rights and digital threats was highlighted. It was suggested that the agenda for discussing human rights and digital threats should involve not only the presidency but also all stakeholders, including member states and the advisory board.

Inclusivity and the reduction of civic space were viewed as important topics that require extensive discussion. There is concern about the diminishing civic space and the marginalisation of NGOs in many countries.

Furthermore, the decrease in online civic space was considered crucial given the digital threats to human rights. It was observed that the FOC needs to strike a balance between embracing diversity and maintaining its effectiveness in addressing these issues.

However, it was suggested that the FOC should avoid trying to mimic the United Nations. Including all countries and engaging in impossible negotiations were viewed as an undesirable approach. Instead, the FOC should focus on maintaining meaningful exchanges and taking effective positions.

Overall, the analysis presented the support and opinions of various speakers on different aspects of the Freedom Online Coalition. It highlighted the importance of training policymakers, energising the coalition, upholding human rights, expanding digital equality, and engaging stakeholders. It also underscored the need for agenda setting, internal coordination, inclusivity, addressing the decrease in online civic space, and maintaining a balanced approach within the FOC.

Irene

During the discussion, the speakers highlighted the significant role played by the Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) in coordinating multi-stakeholder discussions on AI and Human Rights. The FOC served as a crucial platform for connecting various communities with differing levels of capacity and knowledge, facilitating the sharing of information and experiences. The speakers emphasized the importance of inclusivity and a proactive approach in organizing these discussions, despite the challenges they presented. The process of organizing the multi-stakeholder discussions often took longer than expected due to the complexity of the issues involved. However, it was acknowledged that although inclusivity can sometimes lead to discomfort, it is a necessary aspect of the process.

The speakers also discussed the tendency of governments to not naturally adopt a consultative approach. One speaker, Irene Xu, observed that governments often do not have a natural inclination towards being consultative. This observation highlights the need for deliberate efforts to foster consultation and engagement between governments and various stakeholders.

The rise of digital technology has brought technical issues to the forefront of political discourse. It was noted that even developed countries like Canada find it difficult to track all digital and tech initiatives. The complexity and ever-changing nature of these initiatives require continuous efforts to promote awareness and understanding.

Furthermore, there was a call for more specific guidance to engage with global majority countries and civil society. The importance of two-way communication and understanding the specific engagement requirements of these groups was emphasized. It is crucial to develop strategies that take into account the unique challenges faced by these communities.

The speakers also discussed the value of capacity building, technical expertise, and understanding of international systems in engagement efforts. An improved understanding of international systems like the UN in New York can provide valuable insights and contribute to more effective engagement. Efforts should be made to provide capacity-building opportunities and technical expertise to strengthen engagement and ensure meaningful and productive interactions.

It was suggested that being more creative with multi-stakeholder collaborations and multilateralism can help address capacity issues efficiently. Collaborative initiatives such as the FOC, International Idea, and Media Freedom Coalition were cited as examples of successful partnerships that have enabled the development of important initiatives like the Global Declaration on Information Integrity.

In conclusion, the speakers expressed their overall support for multi-stakeholder collaborations as they lead to efficient outcomes. The FOC, along with other collaborations, has shown that productive results can be achieved through such partnerships. These collaborations have facilitated the exchange of knowledge and the development of initiatives that contribute to the promotion of AI and Human Rights.

Boye Adekoke

The analysis emphasises the importance of inclusivity and multi-stakeholderism within the Freedom Online Coalition (FOC). It showcases the diverse range of expertise that the FOC has within its membership, which greatly contributes to the development of digital rights and effective governance. The involvement of stakeholders from various backgrounds, including governments, civil society organisations, and private sector actors, ensures that a wide range of perspectives are considered in decision-making processes.

One notable aspect of the FOC is its strong accountability demonstrated through the statement development and engagement process. This process involves rigorous consultations with stakeholders and ensures that decisions are made collectively, thereby enhancing transparency and legitimacy. As a result, the FOC’s outputs are seen as reliable and trustworthy due to the inclusive and participatory nature of their development.

In contrast, the analysis raises concerns about the over-reliance on multilateralism as a solution to global challenges. It highlights the potential for inequitable power dynamics in multilateral forums, which can lead to disproportionate influence by powerful nations. This imbalance may result in the limited ability of small or less powerful countries to shape global norms that align with their interests and needs. Additionally, the complexity and sometimes contradictory nature of multilateral rules can make it challenging for countries to navigate and adhere to them effectively.

However, the FOC is presented as a potential solution to mitigate the challenges associated with multilateralism. Due to the diverse range of stakeholders involved, the FOC is capable of providing a more balanced perspective on digital rights and governance issues. The coalition’s strong accountability system ensures that decisions and actions are held to high standards, further enhancing its credibility. Moreover, the FOC’s active involvement in global processes has proven beneficial, as it leverages the inputs and expertise of its diverse members.

In conclusion, the analysis underscores the importance of inclusivity and multi-stakeholderism in the FOC for effectively addressing digital rights and governance challenges. It acknowledges the strengths of the FOC, such as its diverse expertise, strong accountability, and legitimate outputs. While caution is warranted in heavily relying on multilateralism, the FOC can serve as a valuable platform for mitigating the risks and complexities associated with it.

Maria

The discussion held at the IGF focused on leveraging the experience of collaboration and multi-stakeholder engagement to shape global norms and advocate for the rights of human rights defenders, civil society journalists, and other stakeholders. The importance of the Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) as a valuable platform was emphasized, with recognition of its capacity to progressively enlarge and welcome more diverse participants. The discussion highlighted the need for interoperability and the use of existing frameworks, instead of establishing new regulations, to shape FOC priorities. Incorporating the inclusion agenda was seen as a key area for FOC to make an impact, promoting reduced inequalities and partnerships for the goals. The FOC’s role in coordinating international discussions on cybersecurity and its commitment to inclusivity through diverse stakeholder engagement were also emphasized. The use of sub-entities within the FOC to shape priorities, improving diplomatic network coordination, and government coordination for capacity building and inclusivity were identified as critical. In summary, the FOC’s work should be prioritized and improved to enhance inclusivity, ensure the implementation of global norms, and promote the rights of all stakeholders.

Maria :
We are starting the last day of IGF of 2023 with this very relevant conversation about how we can leverage the freedom of online coalition at international organizations for the work and support the exercise of rights. So for this conversation I am Maria Paz Canales, I am the head of legal policy and research at Global Partners Digital and I have the pleasure to be the moderator and be joined by a distinguished panel of representatives from the governments of Canada, United States and the Netherlands that hold the chair of the freedom of online coalition in the previous periods, in the current period and it will be taken over for the following one in the case of the Netherlands. And also for distinguished members of the advisory network of the freedom of online coalition that represent civil society organizations and also bring their perspective to this very important conversation about how we can discuss more about the opportunities and challenges of using the FOC to shape global norms and advocate for human rights defenders, civil society journalists and other stakeholders in multilateral institutions and processes. So very relevant conversation for all the moving parts that we are confronting in this moment. And because of that, my opening remark, I want to concentrate in this idea of like the interoperability that we usually associate with more technical concept, but today we are seeing like more than ever the need of like ensuring interoperability also regarding frameworks and regarding efforts. So how we can leverage the experience of collaboration at the multilateral level, but also with all the experience and the richness that come from the multi-stakeholder engagement. which is the natural strength of the Freedom Online Coalition. So in that sense, it’s very important to remind that for achieving the true interoperability that we need to have common objectives, and the Freedom Online Coalition precisely has championed the identification of common goals, common objectives of the like-minded states that are united in this coalition, and also have championed the idea of progressively enlarge and welcome more diversity in that participation with recently new states joining the Freedom Online Coalition. One of those very relevant common objectives is the approach to protect and promote human rights that unite all the members of this relevant coalition, and make it through this slogan that many of the human rights advocates in the digital sphere, we pursued for many years ago, make the same rights valid online and offline. And for this, it’s not necessarily imperative to establish entirely new regulations. Sometimes we need to take advantage of what already we have developed in many frameworks. And for that, consistently, the advisory network has been supporting also the work of the government in trying to leverage all the advocacy work and experience and the interpretation that comes from the international human rights system in order to enhance this collaboration and promote more effective protection of rights. With that note, I want to give the floor to the relevant people in this conversation, the ones that represent, as I mentioned at the beginning, the past experience in leveraging the value of this network. the ones that represent the present experience, and the one that come with a lot of new plans and hopes and new brand possibilities continuing this very fruitful collaboration. So first, we will welcome Miss Irene Xu, who is the representative from the Canadian government, to give her a little bit of her thoughts in terms of the experience of the Canadian government leading the efforts of the FOC. Please, Irene.

Irene:
Great, thank you, everyone. So I’ll speak a bit about Canada’s experiences. So we were the chair during the 2022 year, and before that, in the lead up to the UNESCO recommendation on the ethics of AI, we were the chair of the Tax Force on AI and Human Rights. And before the negotiations really started, we thought that we had to take a proactive and deliberate approach to having a multi-stakeholder discussion that would inform all of our engagement in the negotiations. So we had started with a briefing from UNESCO to the FOC Paris Diplomatic Network, which our mission to UNESCO also leads, the diplomatic network. The benefits of the FOC is that, even though we’re very like-minded in terms of values and principles, it is fairly cross-regional with differing levels of capacity and knowledge on these issues. So that first briefing was really important to get everyone on the same page about what was at stake and the main issues, and UNESCO’s goals for the recommendation. And then really from there, it was very much an iterative and sometimes messy process. We had regular meetings within the task force. involving countries, society and tech companies and the advisory network. And really, it was really helpful because these issues aren’t necessarily multidisciplinary. And we’re used to that when we’re formulating national negotiating positions, having to talk to different departments, society, industry. And so you had to bring together people with policy experience, with multilateral experience, with the technical expertise and very few people who know all three and could try to bring those together. Even in the negotiations themselves, which were unfortunately all virtual due to COVID, some delegations, it was very much a multi-stakeholder negotiation. Even some delegations represented by professors with expertise in AI. And so you had to do a lot of translating between the different communities, but that’s why the FOC was such a valuable place to do that coordination, bringing all those communities together. And then just maybe some lessons learned. Like I said, to be inclusive and multi-stakeholder really needs to be a deliberate and proactive decision from the start. It’s not gonna happen on its own. Plan that it will take more time than you think it will take. The issues are complex. There’s always going to be tensions. And as we like to say, if you’re not uncomfortable, you’re probably not being inclusive enough. And we also all just need to, I think it’s not, as governments, it’s not always our natural tendency to want to be consultative, but that’s why it needs to be a deliberate decision to kind of step out of normal practices to make that happen. Thanks.

Maria :
I would like to invite Veronica Ferrari from APC, Association for Progressive Communication, who is a member of the advisory network, to comment a little bit about the benefits of the multi-stakeholder engagement. Thank you very much, Irene. And on that note, about the value of the multi-stakeholder engagement and even the value of feeling a little bit uncomfortable, which is something that I think is very important. I would like to invite Maria Paz, who is a member of the advisory network, to comment a little bit about the benefits of this multi-stakeholder dialogue and what had been the experience of championing this through the work of the advisory network in collaboration with the FOC.

Veronica Ferari:
Great. Thanks, Maria Paz, and thanks for the remarks from Canada. I would like to thank the FOC for incorporating the inclusion agenda and putting that at the center of the FOC. That was continued under the U.S. chairship, and we hope it will be continued in the next chairship. So, again, thank you for the opportunity to speak today, for the invitation. I’m glad to be here. As Maria Paz was saying, I am a member of the advisory network, where I represent APC. APC is a multi-stakeholder network. We have over 40 countries located mostly in the global majority. So we are a network committed to creating a just and sustainable world by supporting people to use and shape the Internet. So APC advocates and works towards more robust and meaningful multi-stakeholder collaboration, where those who are affected by digitalization and digital policies, particularly marginalized populations, have a voice in the decision-making process. And I think this has been really important for us to have a national vision and international level. So in this sense, APC sees the FOC as a valuable platform to advance this goal of multi-stakeholder collaboration. So as I just said, the increased emphasis at the FOC on digital inclusion, on incorporating the voice of marginalized groups, we think it’s a really positive step, where engagement with community-based programs like Fcar所, where we’re learning how, and, how are we replacing models that have been required? So there is more to be done in that sense. So, I think I wanted to highlight the role of the task forces and the sub-entities as good examples of multi-stakeholder collaboration within the FOC in addressing specific focus areas and also in translating principles and statements into practical actions. So, for example, in the case of AI, we believe that when discussing norms related to artificial intelligence and emerging technologies, from our perspective, from APC, the focus should be on the implication of these systems for human rights, for social justice, also for sustainable development. So, the norms discussion should not be only around technology but also about the inequalities that these technologies can create or even exacerbate. So, from the FOC, working on decisions on new emerging technologies and AI is key to work with the TIFER but also with the Digital Equality Task Force to incorporate perspectives from marginalized groups. So, the role of the sub-entities has been key in shaping FOC priorities, the program of work, also informing discussions on these issues through learning opportunities, and also serve as a mean to engage other groups that are not necessarily part of the FOC and the advisory network. And I wanted to bring an example of which we believe in terms of setting norms that build on multi-stakeholder collaboration. I wasn’t part of the FOC at that moment, but my colleagues from APC were really involved in this. It’s the FOC Joint Statement on the Human Rights Impact of Cybersecurity Laws, Practices, and Policies from 2020. So, that statement contains recommendations for national cybersecurity practices and international processes and draws on the input of a multi-stakeholder FOC working group on that topic. So, that statement underscores the importance of a human-centric approach to cybersecurity, the need to build on international human rights frameworks when shaping international cyber norms. So, this leads to my final point. We believe that the FOC could play a key role in coordinating international discussions, for example, on cyber security and cyber crime, because particularly at the UN and some of the processes there, building on language and positions that are already there, that exist, and there is consensus about that, so that was one of the points that I wanted to mention. I know that we are talking about more processes and connections, so I may stop here, but I just wanted to highlight the importance of multistakeholder collaboration, how FOC has proven as a key platform for that, and how we can still do better and more in that sense. So thank you, Maripaz.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Veronica, for those remarks. Now I’m going to give the floor to Alison Petters, who is the representative of the U.S. government, that have held in this period the chairship of the FOC, to also share a little bit more about this engagement through diplomatic efforts and how you have tried to provide more efficacy also to this coordination, which is always a challenge when a group starts and it’s small, it’s easier maybe, but when you need to accommodate and welcome new members and new realities and new contexts, there are challenges in the coordination itself, and I’d like to also share a little bit of the U.S. government leading that experience during the last chairship of the FOC.

Alison Petters:
Well, first, good morning, everyone. Thank you so much, Maria. It’s really a pleasure on the last day of IGF to be joined by two very close friends, partners in crime, the government of Canada and the governments of Netherlands, as well as our friend Veronica from the advisory network of this global coalition focused on human rights online. The United States has been really just tremendously thrilled to be the chair of this global coalition this year. We set out at the first Summit for Democracy to bolster both our engagement and work through the Freedom Online Coalition, but bolster the work of the coalition as a whole in terms of impacting multilateral processes, multi-stakeholder processes around the globe focused on technology-related issues. I think we learned a lot of hard lessons. We saw both challenges and successes. I think perhaps the most important lesson learned for us is the need to have very strong political will at the top of our leadership chain as the chair of this coalition. We had a presidential commitment to chair the coalition. We’ve had engagement from our Secretary of State. We recently hosted a ministerial-level conversation at the UN General Assembly High-Level Week. We’ve been able to bring in more members into the coalition as a result of that strong engagement and political leadership at the top of our chain. Advancing a rights-respecting approach to technology-related issues is central to the Biden administration’s approach on technology policy. And so that has really helped us as the chair make sure that we are continuing to sort of hold ourselves accountable and getting a lot done this year. Certainly, we saw a lot of successes in terms of building the capacity of the Freedom Online Coalition during our chairship. Perhaps most importantly, building up our diplomatic networks both in Geneva and New York and working to expand those in other cities as well in order to coordinate in advance of some really key multilateral processes. So we’ve coordinated through the Freedom Online Coalition in New York around the UN Cybercrime Treaty negotiations, for example, working closely with the advisory network to bring in their perspectives in those treaty negotiations. We’ve coordinated through the Freedom Online Coalition in advance of an emerging technology resolution being considered in the Human Rights Council, making sure also that we’re talking through what priorities and perhaps threats to human rights are most critical in terms of addressing in any such resolution in the Human Rights Council. There’s been coordination in UNESCO around the guidance for digital platforms, making sure also that we’re bringing in the perspectives of the advisory network there in particular as there’s been very strong views amongst multi-stakeholders on that process in particular. The second piece I think that we’ve seen in terms of successes is really making sure that we are giving opportunities for members to facilitate coordination not just in capital cities but also through our embassies in countries around the globe. There perhaps is most critical when we’re talking about responses to threats to human rights online, so particular cases of internet shutdowns or particular cases where we’ve seen human rights defenders be targeted by digital attacks. Making sure that we are strengthening our coordination in those countries directly with our diplomats that are serving at our embassies has really been perhaps a key success of ours in our chairship this year. And then third I’ll just say in terms of a success, I think we have been successful in bringing in new issue sets into the Freedom Online Coalition continuing to evolve. We had the entire Freedom Online Coalition issue a joint statement in the Human Rights Council most recently looking at the threat of surveillance technologies. We were able to gain a host of additional governments. We’re so pleased. I think the number is nearly 60 now that have joined on, so we’ve taken this issue set, we’ve coordinated in this coalition, and then we’ve taken it out to other governments to join us. Similarly, we issued a set of guiding principles on government use of surveillance technologies. There are, of course I don’t need to tell many of you in this room, a suite of surveillance technologies that are front and center in terms of the threats to human rights defenders, journalists, political opposition figures. years, dissidents, you name it, this is a particular threat when we talk about artificial intelligence systems embedded in those surveillance technologies and we have been successful in developing these guiding principles and government use of surveillance tech that really sort of establishes what our rights respecting use would look like when it comes to these technologies. We were pleased that the whole FOC joined on to these guiding principles and then again, we were able to take that into the Summit for Democracy context and gain additional support. Certainly though, we’re not without challenges and rooms for improvement. I think one of the biggest challenges that we have is just linking human rights folks up with cyber and digital folks in each and every one of our governments. I’m sure we would all agree. Sometimes we can be siloed and so the need to bring in both of those perspectives when we’re making decisions and developing outputs of this coalition has really been a challenge for us and I think every government at this table and in the FOC. Second challenge of course is visibility of the Freedom Online Coalition. There are a lot of coalitions out there. I’m engaged in a number as I’m sure both of you are as well and Veronica from the Advisory Network and so making sure that we are keeping the Freedom Online Coalition sort of front and center and a lot of these policy discussions has been really a place where I think we continue to feel like there’s room for improvement. And then last I’ll say, we continue to see room for improvement in terms of diversifying our membership, bringing in more countries from the global majority. This is something that has been a critical priority for us. To your point Maria, not to grow this too large of a size where coordination just becomes near impossible but really to grow this. with diversity of perspectives in mind. So we are not just making decisions that impact governments in one region or another, but we’re making decisions that are holistic of the entire globe. There, this continues to be a priority and we look forward to working with the government of the Netherlands to bring in more members of the global majority into the conversation. So I could probably go on with the challenges and areas for improvement, but we wouldn’t be able to have achieved the successes that we did without the support of you all at the table and so many in this room in particular. So thank you very much.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Alison. And with that, I think this is the perfect sea way to Ambassador Ernst Norman, who represent the Netherlands, the new chairship of the Free Online Coalition for the following year. Precisely with all these relevant learns and experience that have been shared by your colleagues that previously hold the seat of the chairship. What are your views and your perspective in terms of the challenges and the opportunities and the plans that you bring as the new leadership of this coalition? Thank you very much for being here.

Ernst Norman:
Thank you very much, Maria. And so glad to be invited at this table as a newcomer. And it’s fascinating to attend this internet governance forum and to meet so many people. And it’s all this interesting discussions like we have this morning as well. And one to have a special mention on this subject, who’s sitting in front of me, being responsible actually for all the work on the Freedom Online Coalition from our side. So thank you for that. And I want to thank Erin and Alison for sharing your lessons learned on the Freedom Online Coalition. Now, Canada has shown us how Freedom Online Coalition policymakers can be trained on difficult technical topics like artificial intelligence. and how then this knowledge can be used in diplomatic negotiations. Although written two years before the public launch of generative AI, the FOC Joint Statement on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights still holds up. This is due to the fact that Canada organized, during the pandemic, virtual classes for the policymakers, where they were informed by experts in academia, tech companies and NGOs on AI and machine learning. This knowledge base ensured that the FOC had an excellent position to coordinate this position around the UNESCO negotiations on AI and ethics. The US has done magnificent work on further energizing the FOC and Alison mentioned a number of issues that have been brought to the table. Like you have brought the FOC to the Summit for Democracy and underlined at the highest level that digital human rights is one of the biggest challenges of our time. Also, the US has done some important housekeeping on the coalition. With a new and updated terms of reference, the coalition is ready for the next 10 years. Although this might not be the most sexy subject from a PR perspective, it is most difficult for a diplomatic network. Getting everyone to agree on these changes was no small feat. So thank you very much for doing this important work. And it makes our work easier again. Thank you. Now it’s up to us to continue these important lines of work and that in a key year for digital governance. The GDC, as we all have been seeing in the last few days, will be the internet governance event for next year. Followed quickly by the WSIS plus 20. The next 18 months will be pivotal for the future of the internet and to make sure that we will be the internet we want. The Netherlands aims to keep the Internet multi-stakeholder organized, with a strong focus on human rights as a cross-cutting theme. For us, the FOC will be a key coalition to coordinate our positions in this important forum. For three good reasons. First, the FOC has played a key role in earlier processes and has proven to be an essential force in protecting the multi-stakeholder model of the Internet. And secondly, and possibly more important, the FOC is a global, inter-regional coalition with countries from all continents. As we have heard in the last few days, digital equality and expanding connectivity are still a challenge not sufficiently addressed by the past IGFs. If we want to move forward on Internet and AI governance, we must include a global majority perspective. We will therefore seek to broaden FOC’s memberships, I would say further expand, because you have done excellent work already on that topic, but especially with like-minded countries from the global majority, and have them engaged actively in the discussions. Having the FOC presidency, we want to make sure that the FOC’s position in the GDC negotiations is widely supported and realistic. And thirdly, with the FOC we have a long history of engaging with all the stakeholders. They are involved through the FOC advisory network and provide us, governments, with solicited and unsolicited advice on these important governance aspects. These elements of the FOC, our history, our expertise, our diverse membership and multi-stakeholder structure make the FOC an excellent coalition to coordinate our positions on the important themes such as Internet governance and AI, but also I would like to thank all the countries who have supported this important declaration. Thank you.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Ambassador. And I think that with that final remark in terms of the value of the multi-stakeholder engagement for digital technologies governance, I would like to bring also someone from the advisory network that will join us online for making also more inclusive this conversation. So we have Boye Adekoke from Paradigm Initiative that will provide some additional remarks and thoughts about how we can think about the multi-stakeholder model in terms of like the digital governance. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. are for this model and the switching to multilateralism and how the value of this model, multi-stakeholder model supported so strongly as we have heard by the Fe assists, by the past, by the present, will be enhanced and could be an opportunity to continue to advocating and advancing the mission of ensuring human rights-based approach in all the digital technologies governance. So, Boye, can you hear us and can you bring your perspective? Thank you.

Boye Adekoke:
Yeah, thank you very much. I hope I’m audible. You can hear me over there. Thank you very much for the opportunity for me to contribute to this conversation. And thanks to the FOS3 support unit for putting together this session and for asking me to, you know, share perspective. I think a lot has been said. Again, congratulations to the government of Netherlands for assuming the chairmanship and great work to the United States government for the amazing work that they’ve done in the past one year. A lot has been said during this conversation and some of the things that I was going to mention are already been mentioned. So I will just gladly skip those so that I can make the other point. I think the point about inclusivity has been stressed and that of multistakeholderism in terms of the power of FOC to bring all of these to the table. But I also want to say one of the importance of the FOC and one of the benefits that the globe can benefit from leveraging what the FOC has done in the past year is that the FOC is also a platform with diverse expertise. So apart from the fact that the FOC has done a great job in ensuring inclusivity, in ensuring multistakeholderism, what you would also find within the FOC is a diverse kind of expertise. So even within different stakeholder groups, you find different people coming with different expertise. For example, I’m a member of the Advisory Network. I represent an organization, but I would say, tell you for free, that even while I represent an organization, even as an organization, we also represent a network of a number of other, you know, civil society organization focusing on different kinds of expertise within the digital inclusion and digital rights space, you know, across the globe. So I think this is also one of the benefits of, or one of the value that the FOC can offer, you know, some of these global processes in terms of setting global norms and all of that. But I also think something that I’ve seen, you know, working to the FOC is accountability. I think that the FOC also has a very great level of, you know, accountability system in terms of how the Advisory Network and the FOC itself as a coalition in terms of how we engage in developing, you know, statements, in developing comments on many processes that the FOC have been engaged in. And I think this is very great for, you know, for in terms of setting, you know, very reliable global norms in terms of creating very effective system. It can help prevent abuses of power and ensure that global norms are implemented, you know, effectively. I also think that one of the benefit that I see within this context is also legitimacy. A lot of the, you know, statements that the FOC have put out have gone through a lot of rigorous process, you know, involving Advisory Network member and the FOC countries and all the FOC nations themselves. So at the end of the day, what we have a lot of times is we have legitimate outputs. And I think that this principle can also, you know, be mainstreamed to how, you know, global norms are set in terms of getting that, you know, legitimacy from various, you know, diverse group of stakeholders. So. These are a few points that I think that are, you know, kind of very, very relevant or valuable in terms of how the L4C operates that I think that a global norm can benefit from. And, you know, very quickly before I keep quiet, I also like to say that it’s very important that I say that we have to be very careful in terms of our system of the digital policy or the digital norms that are being set in this age and time to avoid the mistakes of the past. There might be that temptation, you know, to absolutely resort to multilateralism. I just come back from the ad hoc session, you know, on the cybercrises that the UN is currently working on. And I see that temptation a lot of times to overly, you know, resort to multilateralism, you know, by not giving to society voices enough opportunity to make contribution during some of these sessions. I was in the room, so I see this happen practically. So I think that’s something that we need to be very careful of. And I think that’s where L4C can also come in again, because whether we like it or not, within the multilateralism set up, there is always inequitable power dynamics in multilateral forums. Powerful nations may have disproportionate influence, you know, potentially leading to norms that primarily serve their interests. Similar, smaller or less powerful nations may have very limited ability to shape, you know, global norms to their advantage. And I think the L4C provides some sort of, you know, platform whereby this can be mitigated to very large extents. I already mentioned accountability the other time, but I also want to mention what I also call the problem of fragmentation and complexity, because over time, multilateralism can lead to proliferation of agreements, treaties, and norms, creating a complex and sometimes contradictory web of rule that can be challenging to navigate and implement. So I also think that the FOC can really, really come handy in terms of helping to mitigate some of these challenges with multilateralism and also making sure that the mistakes of, you know, assuming that nations can just come together and develop norms and develop, you know, rules to guide, you know, behaviors within the international context. It can be very problematic. And the FOC in that instance, I think is also a very great platform that can help in terms of mitigating those types of challenges. Because as a member of the FOC, I’ve seen how many of the processes that we’ve been involved in, many of the, you know, many of the involvement of the FOCs even in global processes has benefited a lot from inputs of the different members of the FOC, inputs from, you know, from diverse groups, input from representation of diverse communities, et cetera, that, you know, the FOC embody. So I think this is very important. And I think that it’s just a great opportunity for the world to benefit or for the world to leverage the amazing work that is being done by the FOC. And I also see the FOC as also an evolving, emerging, you know, platform that continues to improve, that continues to expand. So it’s at this point, I’ll just put a stop to here. Thank you very much.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Boye, for being part of this conversation today. And I think that with your remarks, we have also a good seaway in opening a little bit more, also a conversation to the ones in the table, but also in the room and even participants online, if there are someone that want to jump in the conversation. Exploring a little bit more, like Ambassador have reminded us, the importance of the housekeeping. We have heard from each one of the chairships, the past, the current and the future about how important it’s like to address the issue of coordination, because even when we can… in terms of the values and being like-minded in terms of the goal of promotional protection of human rights related to digital technologies. This need an operational layer. And that’s the challenge that is up to the coalition to figure out every year for continue developing the great work that had been doing. So in that sense, in a more operative way, how we can think about what are the key subject matters or the processes that you identify as the one that will need to be prioritized in the following year for the improvement of diplomatic network coordination ahead of any relevant negotiation of any of these identified processes. And in that same line, how can the FOC leverage its previous work and upcoming work to enhance the ability that governance processes have a meaningful inclusive approach of majority world voices and this multi-stakeholder nature that we have discussed is the essence of really have a process that can be fully aligned with the best protection of human rights. So I invite anyone around the table to react, but also from the audience. I don’t know. You want, yeah.

Alison Petters:
Well, I think this is kind of the heart of this discussion today we’ve had several days now of IGF. And I think all of the processes that probably every single one of us would list have been on the agenda for IGF sessions this week. So we do have right now an ad hoc committee that is going between Vienna and New York negotiating a UN cyber crime treaty. This is critical that we have a tightly scoped criminal justice instrument that protects a rights respecting approach to the investigation of. cyber crimes, and they’re having the Freedom Online Coalition be a key voice and mechanism in which we can coordinate our perspectives amongst like-minded partners is going to be really critical. We’ve heard a lot of discussion about the global digital compact process. We have also, of course, looked ahead to WSIS Plus 20 as one of the central processes where internet governance issues are going to be on the agenda. And then we have other processes that have been discussed, things like the High-Level Advisory Board and artificial intelligence. I think the key to each and every one of these processes is it’s going to be mission-critical, the most important thing that this coalition does, to make sure that we are focused on protecting human rights online, and that means protecting the existing human rights insurance that we have that guide all of our work in the UN system and multilateral institutions, and not taking us backwards. So that’s first and foremost, not undermining the existing frameworks that we have. Second, I think, is going to be mission-critical, that we’re focused on protecting marginalized and vulnerable groups. There continues to be efforts in multilateral fora, multi-stakeholder fora around the globe to undermine protections for women and girls and all their diversity, undermine protections for LGBTQI plus individuals, undermine protections for other marginalized and vulnerable groups. And we can use this coalition to make sure that we are continuing at every turn to make sure that we are putting those groups at the heart of the human rights agenda, and that we are also making sure that we are consulting with those stakeholders to make sure that we’re representing their perspectives. Third, we heard a lot of discussion, and I think Boye also talked a lot about this, and the need to make sure that we’re protecting them. multi-stakeholder model. We have processes in the United Nations that in some ways are inherently governmental because the United Nations is a composition of member states. But it is very critical that we are protecting efforts to ensure that multi-stakeholders can engage. And that means getting the modalities right for a number of those processes so multi-stakeholders are able to not just be there at the table, but actually meaningfully engage. And I’ve heard a lot of discussion here this week about that as well. And then last, I’ll just say I think it’s going to be really critical that we are evolving as a coalition, that we are not just focused on the traditional threats to internet freedoms that we’ve been looking to protect since this coalition was founded over a decade ago, but that we are putting on the table new threats to human rights online. So I spoke about some of our efforts on surveillance technologies. Certainly when we look to issues around artificial intelligence governance, both the opportunities and threats that we see there to human rights. And so continuing to make sure that we are really evolving as a coalition and putting the most critical priorities on the table in these processes is going to be really important. And we can’t do that without the advisory network in this room and beyond here at IGF to make sure that they’re holding us accountable to actually doing so.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Alison. I don’t know if any of the other representatives want to react. And also, Veronica, I think that maybe it will be very relevant to hear from you about particularly this challenge of being truly inclusive and have a really effective way to engage these marginalized communities. It’s a challenge. It’s not easy. We know as civil society organization that we work. We are representative in so many cases. of this marginalized community’s interest and perspective, but truly inclusive means to bring the affected people to the conversation, and that’s itself a challenge. So, Veronica, your take on that.

Veronica Ferari:
Yeah, yeah, thanks, Maripaz. Yeah, I was listening to Allison. I just wanted to say plus one to some of the things she just mentioned. So, yeah, in terms of priorities, cybercrime treaty negotiations, I agree with that. Again, UN cybersecurity-related processes like the Open Ended Working Group, we are seeing language on human rights being weakened in negotiations, so that would be a good space for coordination, and the FOC could be a key platform for that. And we’ve been hearing during these days how the next years are critical for internet governance. So, again, as Allison’s saying, which is plus 20 as a key and foundational process for internet governance, as the IGF, as one of the main outcomes, as a symbol for multi-stakeholder model, and things that we need to protect as a community. So, another key process is the GDC and the negotiations. We had a civil society meeting on day zero for coordination around the GDC, and it was raised the need for multi-stakeholder and civil society participation in the GDC negotiations, and we also believe that the FOC can play a key role in facilitating that. Again, as Allison was saying, there are too many forums and initiatives to follow, so connections and a bit more coordination, or knowing a bit more what’s happening in all these coalitions and spaces. So, I was thinking about the FOC, but also Tech for Democracy, the global partnership, so how we can better coordinate around these efforts, since a lot of the organizations are following these same processes. And I wanted to raise a point connected with the idea of meaningful inclusive approach, and the idea of majority voices being heard, and their perspectives being taken into account in the conversations. So, I also heard during this week the need for. inclusion thinking at the regional level. So multi-stakeholder reason is not only about different stakeholders, but also different regions being represented. So I remember like, and we discussed that a lot, like Canada during the chairship organized regional consultations, and that’s a good experience that it could be good also to see that in the FOC and in different processes. And I wanted to take the opportunity also to raise one main obstacle for meaningful inclusivity and presence of global majority voices, which is the visas. So a lot of staff from APC and also people from our members couldn’t come to Japan because of visa issues. We experienced the same with negotiation of the UN in New York and in Europe too. This is not like an isolated thing. We see this as a, of course, as a product of a systematic issue, but it’s important to address that when we talk about inclusivity and majority global voices in this conversation, how that’s a barrier and how to think alternatives, but also how to address this structural problem. Those were some of the points I wanted to raise. Thank you.

Maria :
Thank you very much, Veronica. And I invite you, anyone else want to jump in on this question, but also bring new questions to the conversation. Ambassador, please. Thank you.

Ernst Norman:
But what Ellen was already mentioned, the number of subjects, I mentioned them too, but what Alison also said was relevant that the agenda must be evolving. And on the agenda setting, it’s not only the presidency who’s responsible for that, that’s indeed to discuss it with all involved, not only the member states in the coalition, but indeed the advisory board as well. On the human rights, I would like to stress that it’s important also for us governments at home to coordinate with your own other human rights departments because human rights. the digital threats to human rights is a vehicle, but it’s happening also in the real world. And we may have to be sure that it’s connected in our offices as well, that we don’t have a separate discussion. So please involve all your colleagues who are addressing this issue on human rights. And on inclusivity, that’s actually a topic which is widely discussed also in our ministry, the reduction in civic space. And I think that’s maybe should also be discussed. We can, I mean, we talk about meaningful inclusivity, et cetera, but it’s a wider problem that in many countries, there’s a reduction in civic space in the possibility of NGOs to work, they’re being kicked out, et cetera. So that’s also a serious threat. We can work on inclusivity and in the coalition, but we have maybe also to address this reduction in civic space also online. Thank you.

Maria :
Thank you very much. I don’t know if anyone want to take the floor from the audience for commenting or bringing new issue. If I may also a comment from my side, I think that is very relevant in that inclusivity also that something that you mentioned in your intervention, Alison, related to the coordination of different bodies inside the government, as you were mentioning in the case of like human rights protection in different fronts, but also different level of expertise, because for inclusivity also, we need to create capacity and one key role that the collaboration that is coordinated and created through FOC is like to bring more information about where are the right places in society. It’s difficult to figure out what is the most appropriate interlocutor for having some conversation inside the government. So the role that also the coalition can have like in facilitating that coordination internally in their own governments or across government is also related to facilitate that information for the… more effective action of the advocacy of the civil society in this issue. So, a really interesting point on that. I don’t know if anyone else wants to add something in those lines? Or maybe Irene, do you want to jump in?

Irene:
Sure. So, the only other thing I wanted to mention is, even for Canada, it’s hard to keep track of all the different digital and tech initiatives. These used to be mainly technical issues with some political implications, and now they’ve become political issues that happen to be facilitated through tech. And I think if we want greater participation from both global majority countries and civil society, we need to be much more specific about what we want from them, the kind of engagement we want from them, and also to bring something of value to them. So, whether that’s greater capacity building, better understanding of, I mean, how does New York UN work? I don’t think anyone really knows. And also the technical expertise. So, I think it’s not just about what we want, but it needs to be much more of a two-way conversation between those who are trying to engage and what our goals are.

Maria :
Super important point. Like, how to bring people in the process, but in something that is valuable for everyone around the table. So, we have one comment or question from the audience. Please go ahead and introduce yourself.

Audience:
Sure. Hi, Nikki Muscati. I’m from the U.S. Department of State. I work on the FOC. I have both a question and a comment kind of together. You know, we spend a lot of time in our chairship thinking about how to include various voices in the decision-making process for the priorities that we had in our chairship. And as our deputies and Secretary Allison Peters noted, You know, there is a challenge for how you can bring these voices together, particularly within the global majority, because of the sheer amount of forums and processes that are happening that our governments are all engaged in. And so, I guess, I don’t want to put you on the spot, Ambassador, but, you know, I am curious if you’ve thought a little bit about how you want to maybe narrow your focus during your chairship year next year, and in that, how you’re hoping or planning to engage with some of the already existing global majority voices that are within the coalition to bring them into these processes and these conversations, and then, not to put my own leadership on the spot, but also the Canadian government, you know, what advice might you have for the Dutch government in terms of how to engage these other voices? Of course, you know, we spent a lot of time thinking about this this year, and, you know, as it was noted, the Canadian government did consultations with every region, so maybe if they’re interested in maybe a little bit of a back-and-forth there, if you all would indulge me in the last few minutes, because it is really important that we bolster the existing voices that we have in the coalition, or else, why would someone join?

Ernst Norman:
I would like first to listen to the recommendation of others, because, like I mentioned, I mean, I’m here to learn, and I can say very strong things, but without the experience within the coalition.

Alison Petters:
We heard the advice first. Well, I’m happy to start and turn it over to my colleague from the Government of Canada. I mean, this is the heart of the challenge, right, in terms of expanding the tent, not expanding too large, where we can’t get anything done, making sure that we are expanding the diversity of the advisory network. It would be near impossible to bring in every single voice into the advisory network, so getting that right as well is kind of a key challenge that we have. I don’t think hope is lost. I think some of it, first and foremost, in terms of engaging global majority governments, we have seen successes in bringing additional governments into the fold. Some are not full members yet, but may be joining, but we have already been in very intensive dialogues with them about their priorities as it relates to technology and human rights. So there, I think we learned a good lesson, which is bringing them into the discussions with other FOC members as partners, as equal footing. So at our event in the UN General Assembly recently with the Secretary of State, we invited non-FOC members, some key countries that have important perspectives to bring into the fold as it relates to technology policy, some which are strong democracies, strong records on human rights, but maybe have not engaged with the FOC previously. And so bringing them to the table to add their voices and perspectives has been really important to just get them interested in the work in the FOC, to familiarize them with the FOC’s work. And then following that up with capital level engagement. So as you know well, Nikki, we have really enlisted the support of our ambassadors and our diplomatic corps in these key countries to continue the dialogue. It can’t just be a one-off ministerial level event in the UN and then we say, thanks so much, please join us. It really needs to be a constant dialogue. Third, I would just say a recognition that resources are scarce, I mean, in every government, but some governments have more resources than others. And so, continuing to work with those governments that may feel like they don’t have the resources to engage to both support them and help them perhaps have those resources, but also making the case of what’s in it for them. Like, what are you gonna get out of this if you prioritize this over something else? I mean, we heard a lot about the… proliferation of different processes here. Second, I would just say, you know, in relation to not just governments, but expanding the work that we’re doing with civil society, the advisory network is a key source of support to us, but it certainly, and I’m sure you would agree, it shouldn’t be the only source of support, right? So, for example, the Freedom Online Coalition, our close friends and partners in the U.S. A.I.D., our development agency, has recently launched this week a set of donor principles in the digital age. Not only did we consult the advisory network, our multi-stakeholder component in the Freedom Online Coalition, but we went way beyond that in terms of consulting with civil society in key countries, building out, you know, broader networks of stakeholder voices from global majority countries in particular, and I think that was another example of how we can do this, starting with the advisory network and then sort of building out from there. I would say they’re also leveraging the fact that we are 38 governments and we all have our own networks, and so it shouldn’t just be the chairs’ networks in different countries that we’re consulting, but coming to the government of Canada or coming to the Netherlands and saying, you know, who do you know that we should talk to in these countries is really important, but this is, you know, the heart of the question that we’ve been asking all year, and I’m sure for the Canadian government, the heart of the question they were asking themselves as well, as chair.

Maria :
Thank you so much. Final thoughts on that from the ambassador from the government of Canada? You can go ahead. Okay. We have three minutes. Yeah. Okay.

Irene:
Okay. I’ll try to be quick and talk about a couple of examples. So during last year’s UNGA High Level Week, we organized an event between Freedom Online Coalition, International Idea, and Media Freedom Coalition. I think, like, being more creative with our multi-stakeholders and multilateralism would also help with the capacity issue of different countries not having to join four or five different coalitions outside of the UN processes. And also, when we recently developed the Global Declaration on Information Integrity, we used both International IDEA and Freedom Online Coalition to try to get agreement among democratic and rights-respecting countries on what that would look like. So different ways of trying to be creative with how we approach these things to make things easier for everyone.

Ernst Norman:
Just I think what I just realized is that the FOC is not the IGF, where there’s lots of like-mindedness, but there’s no text to be negotiated or whatever. And you hear some countries being very like-minded with us on subject of human rights, and you wonder, OK, but what’s happening at your home? So it is different. We truly want to be like-minded, and at the same time, we don’t want a copy to be the UN, in the sense that you want to include all countries and have impossible negotiations there. You want to have a meaningful exchange with each other, that we are able to take positions in the end to convince the broad majority, the global majority, and that we indeed are effective in our work. And that’s a balance we have to find, also in enlarging the group. And that’s a challenge, because maybe you want to have some countries, but at the same time, it can be more complex. So indeed, it’s a delicate balance we have to find with each other, and to make sure that the FOC will stay effective in the coming years. Thank you.

Maria :
Thank you very much. Thank you, all the speakers, for being part of this relevant conversation today. I think we have captured relevant learnings, and particularly reinforced that there are clarity in the main values that stick together this coalition, the promotion and protection of human rights, the commitment with inclusive and meaningful stakeholder engagement. and the need of effective coordination and be creative and continue expanding and deepening the action that already have been developed in terms of like all the interoperabilities that I was mentioning at the beginning of the conversation, the interoperability inside different government bodies between different governments that are coming and enlarging the coalition with the challenges that the ambassador just pointed out of like being more diverse, being mindful and accommodate different contexts but without sacrificing the basic values. So on that note, thank you very much for being part of this conversation and have a good final date of IGF. Thank you.

Audience:
Thank you. Thank you all for having me. Yeah, be good. Thank you all. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. We are done. We are done. Yes. Now you can go. Now you can go. Everyone is going to have a chance to leave for the group event. So thank you to all of you for being here. Thank you all very much. Thanks for being here.